Game Speed Statistics

Man yours, and others' guns! ...Sundays 8PM-11PM EST
Post Reply
User avatar
Altaris
Field Marshall
Posts: 5210
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2008 9:54 am
Location: South Carolina, USA

Game Speed Statistics

Post: # 88640Post Altaris
Sat Jun 02, 2018 8:49 pm

I did some research and found some actual statistics on HOI4 speeds. I've outlined it based on speed, seconds to finish 1 month, hours to finish 1 in-game year, and how many sessions (assuming 3 hour session, and game goes from 1936-1945, or 10 years) to finish a game at the speed.
Game Speeds Times.PNG
Game Speeds Times.PNG (8.3 KiB) Viewed 644 times
What most surprised me is the difference in Speed 1 & 2, though these times do correspond closely to what we've seen in game (roughly 2 in-game years per session at speed 2 vs roughly 6 months at speed 1). It's also pretty apparent Speed 1 isn't feasible, the game would never end otherwise.

Assuming games run at least speed 3 for 1936-1939, and speed 2 from that point on, most games could probably be finished in 4-5 sessions this way if they went late in 1944 or 1945, if they ended early, it'd be closer to 3 sessions. And that's moving at speed 2 during the meaty portions of the war, which isn't super-fast.

For 90% of the game, I think Speed 2 is fine and manageable. What I do occasionally struggle with is the constant non-stop action not allowing time to review the front, research, NF, resource situation, etc. It's really hard to stay on top of this while managing a front. I really think this could be mitigated with a short 2-3 minute pause when the NF's fire every 70 days (roughly 5 times a year). This would give people time to quickly adjust key things without having to worry about what's happening on the front. This also doesn't have a huge impact on the time it would take to play the game at the same speeds. For comparison, I ran the same numbers assuming a 3 minute pause 5 times a game year (15 minutes extra per game year), shown below.
Game Speeds Times with NF Pause.PNG
Game Speeds Times with NF Pause.PNG (8.18 KiB) Viewed 644 times
I thought it would be good to share the findings, give actual data behind the speed discussion. I was a bit surprised by some of it myself, especially that Speed 1 is actually about 4 times slower than Speed 2.

User avatar
harbringerxv8
Field Marshall
Posts: 1600
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2006 11:54 pm
Location: Orange County

Re: Game Speed Statistics

Post: # 88641Post harbringerxv8
Sat Jun 02, 2018 10:34 pm

I know you and I have discussed this at length privately, and I'm glad to see the research being put out in the open here.

In short, I agree with Altaris' observations and his solutions, though I have a few additions to make as well.

Speed 1 is unsustainable, that much should be obvious. While it does allow the majors a certain amount of additional control to account for things (Speed 1 made it easier for me as well, as Germany), it really slows the game down to a crawl. And, looking at those stats, two full sessions for every game year is pretty absurd. In addition, I think it makes the game much less interesting for minor players, who imo are just as entitled to an entertaining game as the majors.

Speed 2 is entirely reasonable for a major player, and while it can lead to oversight and mistakes, those mistakes will be made by everyone involved, and the ability to recover from unexpected attacks and manage a large front quickly are perfectly legitimate concerns in any RTS. I think the more time we spend with HOI4 at those speeds, the less of a problem it will be. In addition, I think these issues are minor compared to the much greater problem of stagnant gameplay.

Speed 3 is fine for prewar situations. I don't think Speed 4 is necessary, as it just gets a bit too hectic, and I think most of us prefer a longer than one-session prewar, but that could be just me. I don't mind slowing down to speed 2 for Japan/China, assuming both players are human, and assuming it hasn't devolved into a stalemate.

Finally, I think the short pause after the completion of NFs is fine, with the following exceptions: Short pauses should be allowed upon the declaration of war between two majors (Italy vs. Greece shouldn't get one, for example, but GER vs France/SOV or JAP vs CHI should) for battleplans etc. Brief, and I mean BRIEF pauses (as in 30 seconds or less) should be allowed on an occasional basis to deal with breakthroughs, though these will have to be monitored to prevent either abuse or problems with pace of play. I honestly don't mind a short pause from time to time, but in cases like last session where they are happening every five minutes, it gets quite frustrating.

Other pauses to sort out mechanical issues etc seem not to occur too often, and as such I don't think they really need to be regulated beyond common sense, though a heads up when that is the reason for the pause would be beneficial.

Since we're on the topic of pauses, I'll branch the discussion a bit outward to say that I do not agree with the idea of informing your opponent when a naval invasion is being undertaken. I think this will slow gameplay down to an absolute crawl, especially when we take into account the Pacific and Mediterranean theaters, which often see several invasions occurring in rapid succession from multiple parties. I think it also limits the opportunity for surprise attacks, feints, and most importantly, capitalizing on an enemy's mistakes. If an enemy has left a port unguarded, for example, that is a mistake that should be punished by the other team, not mitigated by a rule that deliberately slows the game down.

That said, if a defender notices the naval invasion, and requires a brief pause to move reserves into position etc, then I think that is perfectly reasonable, so long as it is a brief pause.
-Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.
Napoleon Bonaparte

User avatar
aphrochine
Field Marshall
Posts: 11710
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2006 9:38 pm
Location: Phoenix, AZ US

Re: Game Speed Statistics

Post: # 88642Post aphrochine
Sun Jun 03, 2018 12:15 am

For NF and Research, to alleviate the "waste", you accrue progression into the next for a short period after completion. I think NFs is 15 days, while Research is 30. I'm not 100%, but it's there.


Altaris, you have only played this game in MP playing the largest of the large. I think next game, you should consider playing something a little more focused. You might enjoy it more.

The stats reinforce what I think we all already agree on. Speed 3/4 in prewar. Speed 3 in minor/pre wars. Speed 2 as the standard. Speed 1 for "short" when the beat intensifies.
Image


"A good plan, violently executed now is better than a perfect plan next week." -Patton
"...a bad plan, is always a bad plan." -aphro

User avatar
Altaris
Field Marshall
Posts: 5210
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2008 9:54 am
Location: South Carolina, USA

Re: Game Speed Statistics

Post: # 88643Post Altaris
Sun Jun 03, 2018 3:11 am

aphrochine wrote:
Sun Jun 03, 2018 12:15 am
Altaris, you have only played this game in MP playing the largest of the large. I think next game, you should consider playing something a little more focused. You might enjoy it more.
Agreed.
aphrochine wrote:
Sun Jun 03, 2018 12:15 am
For NF and Research, to alleviate the "waste", you accrue progression into the next for a short period after completion. I think NFs is 15 days, while Research is 30. I'm not 100%, but it's there.
NFs are 10 or 15, not sure which, they are shorter than Research. Research is definitely 30 days of accrual. The pause proposal wasn't meant to avoid waste on either of these, I'll go into my thinking on that in the last part of this post though.
harbringerxv8 wrote:
Sat Jun 02, 2018 10:34 pm
Since we're on the topic of pauses, I'll branch the discussion a bit outward to say that I do not agree with the idea of informing your opponent when a naval invasion is being undertaken. I think this will slow gameplay down to an absolute crawl, especially when we take into account the Pacific and Mediterranean theaters, which often see several invasions occurring in rapid succession from multiple parties. I think it also limits the opportunity for surprise attacks, feints, and most importantly, capitalizing on an enemy's mistakes. If an enemy has left a port unguarded, for example, that is a mistake that should be punished by the other team, not mitigated by a rule that deliberately slows the game down.

That said, if a defender notices the naval invasion, and requires a brief pause to move reserves into position etc, then I think that is perfectly reasonable, so long as it is a brief pause.
Somewhat agreed on this one. However, I'll put that with the caveat that the naval invasion icon can get pushed off the screen, and the siren isn't the most distinguishable thing in the world. However, port and coastal protection needs to be part of any players plan, so in essence I agree with your statement that lack of preparation doesn't warrant a change on everyone else's side. This is a separate topic I'd like to open up at some point, as proper port and coastal protection is pretty key for all powers with a coastline :) My biggest concern over naval invasions is the fact they can just be completely overlooked and missed, even of D-Day scale levels. However, I think the idea of a periodic pause alleviates the need for anything special on naval invasions.

So, as to the pause proposal. I guess my intent here is to see if there's a middle ground proposal that allows some periodic stops without breaking the flow of the game up. I also don't want it to be a source of contention, part the reason I'm not really in favor of player discretion being the guide, as this is likely to frustrate one or the other party as to what brief or acceptable numbers of pauses are. Also, there are certain aspects that you don't always know you need a pause to address. Checking to see if your resources are being traded away for nothing is one of them, quickly looking to see if a new decision has come available, checking if your good generals have a new trait you could pick up, check production and if you need to ask for L/L, these types of things. I'm genuinely looking for a low time intensive, simple solution, this seems like it might be it. I also think it could just be a hard and simple rule, if you get encircled between the 70 day window pause or navally invaded, then that's on the player to resolve without other pauses. Most importantly, it doesn't add much time overhead to the game as a whole.

It's just a proposal, and one I'm putting forth as a straight-forward way to help alleviate the density of the game without impacting game speed much. I think things like this probably need to be put up to a vote between games, voted yea or nay on by the group as a whole, and be able to revisit them between games on whether they work or not.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: greyhoundgames and 3 guests